The problem with the Geneva Communique from the first Geneva round on Syria is that the government of Syria never subscribed to it. It was jointly chaired by the League of Arab States for Syria, whatever that may mean. Another problem is that it is, as so many diplomatic documents are, highly ambiguous. It plainly advocates a power sharing executive formed by some of the current government plus the opposition to oversee a transition to democracy. But it does not state which elements of the current government, and it does not mention which elements of the opposition, nor does it make plain if President Assad himself is eligible to be part of, or to head, the power-sharing executive, and whether he is eligible to be a candidate in future democratic elections.
Doubtless the British, for example, would argue that the term transition implies that he will go. The Russians will argue there is no such implication and the text does not exclude anybody from the process. Doubtless also diplomats on all sides were fully aware of these differing interpretations and the ambiguity is quite deliberate to enable an agreed text. I would say that the text tends much more to the “western” side, and that this reflects the apparently weak military position of the Assad regime at that time and the then extant threat of western military intervention. There has been a radical shift in those factors against the western side in the interim. Expect Russian interpretations now to get more hardline.
Given the extreme ambiguity of the text, Iran has, as it frequently does, shot itself in the foot diplomatically by refusing to accept the communique as the basis of talks and thus getting excluded from Geneva. Iran should have accepted the communique, and then at Geneva issued its own interpretation of it.
But that is a minor point. The farcical thing about the Geneva conference is that it is attempting to promote into power-sharing in Syria “opposition” members who have no democratic credentials and represent a scarcely significant portion of those actually fighting the Assad regime in Syria. What the West are trying to achieve is what the CIA and Mossad have now achieved in Egypt; replacing the head of the Mubarak regime while keeping all its power structures in place. The West don’t really want democracy in Syria, they just want a less pro-Russian leader of the power structures.
The inability of the British left to understand the Middle East is pathetic. I recall arguing with commenters on this blog who supported the overthrow of the elected President of Egypt Morsi on the grounds that his overthrow was supporting secularism, judicial independence (missing the entirely obvious fact the Egyptian judiciary are almost all puppets of the military) and would lead to a left wing revolutionary outcome. Similarly the demonstrations against Erdogan in Istanbul, orchestrated by very similar pro-military forces to those now in charge in Egypt, were also hailed by commenters here. The word “secularist” seems to obviate all sins when it comes to the Middle East.
Qatar will be present at Geneva, and Qatar has just launched a pre-emptive media offensive by launching a dossier on torture and murder of detainees by the Assad regime, which is being given first headline treatment by the BBC all morning
There would be a good dossier to be issued on torture in detention in Qatar, and the lives of slave workers there, but that is another question.
I do not doubt at all that atrocities have been committed and are being committed by the Assad regime. It is a very unpleasant regime indeed. The fact that atrocities are also being committed by various rebel groups does not make Syrian government atrocities any better.
But whether 11,000 people really were murdered in a single detainee camp I am unsure. What I do know is that the BBC presentation of today’s report has been a disgrace. The report was commissioned by the government of Qatar who commissioned Carter Ruck to do it. Both those organisations are infamous suppressors of free speech. What is reprehensible is that the BBC are presenting the report as though it were produced by neutral experts, whereas the opposite is the case. It is produced not by anti torture campaigners or by human rights activists, but by lawyers who are doing it purely and simply because they are being paid to do it.
The BBC are showing enormous deference to Sir Desmond De Silva, who is introduced as a former UN war crimes prosecutor. He is indeed that, but it is not the capacity in which he is now acting. He is acting as a barrister in private practice. Before he was a UN prosecutor, he was for decades a criminal defence lawyer and has defended many murderers. He has since acted to suppress the truth being published about many celebrities, including John Terry.
If the Assad regime and not the government of Qatar had instructed him and paid him, he would now be on our screens arguing the opposite case to that he is putting. That is his job. He probably regards that as not reprehensible. What is reprehensible is that the BBC do not make it plain, but introduce him as a UN war crimes prosecutor as though he were acting in that capacity or out of concern for human rights. I can find no evidence of his having an especial love for human rights in the abstract, when he is not being paid for it. He produced an official UK government report into the murder of Pat Finucane, a murder organised by British authorities, which Pat Finucane’s widow described as a “sham”. He was also put in charge of quietly sweeping the Israeli murders on the Gaza flotilla under the carpet at the UN.
The question any decent journalist should be asking him is “Sir Desmond De Silva, how much did the government of Qatar pay you for your part in preparing this report? How much did it pay the other experts? Does your fee from the Government of Qatar include this TV interview, or are you charging separately for your time in giving this interview? In short how much are you being paid to say this?”
That is what any decent journalist would ask. Which is why you will never hear those questions on the BBC.
being a member of the UN, adopted with the feeling of collective guilt,no doubt about it in 1949, does not mean it is a state in the sense as other states are adopted. i.e. by their decalred borders.
Israel has always managed to ooze its way into international bodies of interest by this method.
That said, I shall go out now, the sun is shining a little, who knows for how long.
Mr Goss
I’ve read your post carefully. You are a pompous ass with an inflated opinion of yourself. But worse, while posing as a sort of Honest John, you are in reality evasive and mendacious. You makes erroneous and tendentious statements and when challenged – through questions – you employ the tactic of not answering and then immediately posing a diversionary question. Our recent exchanges have shown this clearly.
You’ll therefore understand that your “threat” to ignore me leaves me unmoved since, in practice, through your mode of dialogueing, you already do.
Whether you continue to ignore me or not in the future, you can be sure that I shall continue to highlight inanity, half-truths and untruths and over-the-top obsessions whenever necessary and appropriate, as hitherto. The objective after all is not to convince you and your mates here – you are unconvinceable after all – but to inform the more casual reader who approaches any theme with an open mind rather than with a certain view of events and the world towards which all facts are twisted.
So whether its au revoir or adieu is up to you, I really don’t care. Sorry to have been so blunt.
“Europe Considers Wholesale Savings Confiscation, Enforced Redistribution”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-12/europe-considers-wholesale-savings-confiscation-enforced-redistribution
Someone, 13 Feb, 2014 – 9:45 am
The question is Someone why do all the photocopiers, printers, mobile-phones, computers have these information-gathering devices built-in. Who commissioned this? Why, also since about 2002, when somebody makes a purchase of any electronic aid do they have to give their name and address? Who determined this? What kind of a world have we moved into? You used to be able to walk in a shop and buy what you wanted without the shopkeeper or chain wanting all your personal details. What are they doing with them? Loyalty cards are the same. You might like to think you are getting rewarded for your loyalty but you are providing them with a lot more knowledge about yourself and your family than you would ever know.
You could always do the shopping for a neighbour and get the neighbour to do yours. It might have to come to that to confuse the system. It is very disturbing.
There is no real way of avoiding this, but why is it being done?
Nevermind and others
I agree that admitting Israel into the EU as a member would be inappropriate but I wouldn’t worry too much about it if I were you. Firstly, the Israeli wish is not serious (it serves other purposes) and even if it were, there is no way the 28 would agree rebus sic stantibus. It’s not even a question of human rights abuses ; other more important factors are whether Israel is a European state in the geographical sense (the answer is clearly no) and the fact it is in conflict with its neighbours (whether these are states or not). Now, the EU doesn’t believe in admitting such states or states involved in unresolved territorial disputes. You might be tempted to contest this by pointing to the accession of Cyprus, but in that case there were a number of other factors in play which it would be otiose to go into here, but among which was the fact that it was one of 10 qtates acceding as a packet..)
“Why, also since about 2002, when somebody makes a purchase of any electronic aid do they have to give their name and address?”
__________________
Can anyone confirm that this is so? I believe you have to give your details when purchasing a television but that is because of the licence fee. But other electronic stuff – are you sure? It has not been my experience (mobile phone, TV set-top for digital TV etc).
Seumas Milne: A ‘pause’ in centuries of British wars is not enough
‘For the political and commercial elite, British warmaking under the wing of Washington is about state prestige, corporate profits and the protection of a system of global economic privilege. That was the clear message this week from the former first sea lord Sir Jonathon Band, who now works for US defence contractor Lockheed Martin and insists that Britain’s commitment to buy 48 F-35 fighter aircraft “will certainly not be enough”.’
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/12/pause-centuries-british-wars-elite-panicking
reference:
There’s no money and we have to have the ‘cutz’.
Austerity? What austerity?
Mark Urban on Twitter 11 Feb 2014
Britain about to commit £2.5bn to the F-35 fighter project, buying 14 jets, support & long lead items – exclusive on tonight’s @BBCNewsnight
Mary
for info http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II
I know some will have signed this already, although those who believe in torture and cruelty are never likely to, but can I urge others to put their names to this petition. Thanks.
http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/calling-on-the-united-nations-to-investigate-and-hold-israel-to-account-for-the-war-crimes-crimes-against-humanity-they-commit-on-a-daily-basis?utm_source=supporter_message&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=petition_message_notice
Nevermind Israel is already well embedded in the EU. A lot of legislation has gone through giving them commercial access and I believe there are many links in academia too.
One example. I expect you know that most of our generic pharmaceuticals come from Israel owned companies with bases here or on the continent.
There is an European Friends of Israel association
http://www.efi-eu.org/
About EFI http://www.efi-eu.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=item&id=269&Itemid=145
and there is this CoE Zionist supporting set up represented in the EU by Charles Tannock MEP. Note that the Chaplain to the Stock Exchange is on the list!
http://www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com/about/who-we-are/
This counter organisation can provide more details.
European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine
http://www.eccpalestine.org/
At various times I have written to the 10 MEPs who represent the area in which I live objecting to various pieces of legislation which have favoured Israel. I have received replies from two who are both Jewish and who sent fairly hostile replies. The rest – hardly anything to assist.
‘That Israel wants to join the EU is scary, Beelzebub, because it would detach itself from the ME and claim that the EU expansion to include the lands between the Euphrates and the Nile. But that is just one amongst many new and divisive issues that would be advanced in the EU. ‘ (Nevermind)
As buggerlugs states, this aspiration is strictly for publicity. I referenced it only to highlight the moral distinction between what an improvised Palestinian resistance does against a violent opponent, and what self-alleged moral beacon does against a violent opponent. The actions themselves are not too different in intent, of course.
The EU isn’t going to even consider Israel’s entry in the near future. Did Cast Lead and Colossal Tower of Disproportionate Vengeance, as well as Lebanon 2006, ring a few warning bells? Even the EU has limits on what it is prepared to endorse, and it recognises that it cannot support illegal settlements. The EU-aspiration may have been instrumental in getting the EU to declare the then recently (and fairly) elected Hamas to be official terrorists, but I think the EU is wise to that now.
A few years ago, I would have said Turkey, which at least has a toe in Europe, would have had a better chance, but the current government there, (in addition to being faintly Islamicist, and hence official terrorists), seem to be looking east, to their Turkic-speaking relatives, and even, cautiously, to Iran. Another own-goal from the War on Tourism. Turkey would be a great place for Europeans to outsource their production and callcentres. It makes terrific Mercedes buses, for instance. But I digress. I see today’s topic is buggerlugs, as usual.
The UN partitioned Palestine and created a homeland for European Jews, well any old Jews I guess, and that should have been an end to it.
But what was declared as Israel has been expanded upon. Land stolen, ethnic cleansing happening daily.They’ve built a wall everywhere except along their border stealing land.They delegitimise their own country whether it was recognised or not.They deny others the same rights as they demand for themselves.They kill,gas,maim,poison,bomb,torture ignoring human rights, international laws as well as International borders and still want to be treated as the poor victim.Israel is a cancer.Yesterday’s performance in the Knesset with Schulz from the EU was so typical of their arrogance and inability to even address inequality or criticism. The hate was there for all to see.
They are the Nazi’s of today using the same methods in the same way for the same reasons and goals.Chosen people looking for Lebensraum excluding anyone else and they don’t care how they achieve it.Unfortunately supported totally by the Wicked West.
Here it is ! The only democracy in the ME, haha
All he asked was why a settler could use 70 litres of water per day and a palestinian 17.
http://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/schulz-rede-knesset100.html
Netan Yahoo refused to applaud
Where were all these defenders of liberty when a head of state declared a death sentence on someone for writing a book, or when an elected government legitimised suicide bombings against innocent civilians I wonder.
As for those idiots comparing the Us and Israel to the Nazis I suspect they are beyond reason – and if they wish to advertise their ignorance and stupidity they could at least acknowledge that they are given the freedom to do so.
While I don’t agree with Guantanamo or the clear abuses of human rights which were carried out there perhaps I could ask the question to those condemning the US whether they believe that any of the people detained at Guantanamo presented a danger to public safety and liberty, and if so how they should have been dealt with given that much of the evidence held would not ordinarily be admissible in a properly constituted court?
And no I don’t think Israel should be allowed to join the EU – it gets no where near meeting the requirements on human rights.
@Beelzebub
Res Diss – ‘Although Hamas may have been democratically elected I fail to see how that gives it a mandate to carry out the human rights abuses detailed in the HRW report linked to by ESLO.’
That one cuts both ways, doesn’t it? At least Hamas isn’t pretending to the world that it is a civilised state ready to join the EU and lecture everyone else on human rights.
No it doesn’t cut both ways – human rights abuses are human rights abuses whoever they are perpetrated by and cannot be used to excuse each other. Please stick your moral relativism where the sun doesn’t shine.
And whether Hamas or Fateh are responsible for denying the Palestinians democracy really isn’t the issue – I can find little to choose between the two – Fateh is the more corrupt but at least it has stopped giving its formal support to terrorists.
Clark,
You may like read ALL the post’s (two pages), latest post’s on page 2, you may not know about ?.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18516
‘Where were all these defenders of liberty when a head of state declared a death sentence on someone for writing a book,’ (ESLO)
Oban, as far as I remember. Also as far as I remember, the outrage wasn’t confined to the Bleeding Obvious Right, either. My memory also contains the unforgivable thought that if a few more writers as bad as Rushdie were shot, along with everyone who has ever taught a Creative Writing course, the English language might be saved for the next generation…
Unfortunately, Rushdie survived, and it was also a head of state, Khatami, who publicly reversed state support for the fatwa.
So no-one died.
‘No it doesn’t cut both ways – human rights abuses are human rights abuses whoever they are perpetrated by and cannot be used to excuse each other.’
Exactly. You’re beginning to get it. I have hopes for you yet. Now tell the Israelis. Maybe they’ll stop using Palestinian abuses as some kind of lame justification for their own wholly uncivilised, illegal and systematic ones. Being as they’re a recognised state under international law and all.
…still about 100 Palestinians dead for every dead Israeli, btw. Couldn’t get away with that without a healthy dose of moral relativism, eh?
Someone, 9:45 am, thanks.
So modern photocopiers each have hard disk drive built in, and it stores tens of thousands of images. I didn’t know that; I haven’t taken a photocopier apart for over a decade.
When I visit my local recycling centre, I see that it has security fences and closed-circuit “security” cameras. Security for rubbish? Hmmm. The staff are under strict instructions (“it’s more than my job’s worth”) to prevent any member of the public leaving with anything they didn’t bring themselves. Companies hold contracts to take all that stuff away, and councils are very keen to make sure that no one else gets it. I wonder where it all ends up.
I guess that certain companies are making a fortune out of “recycling” masses of personal data.
Exactly. You’re beginning to get it.
I have always got it – your remarks re Rushdie clearly show that you still haven’t. What on earth has the quality of his writing got to do with it?
Interesting, Intuitive and powerful information Mary beyond reproach and discredit – fine feather and stamina to you.
Health and safety rules promote the Machiavellian ‘recycling’ in this case Clark.
“Greek Unemployment Hits New Record; People Employed Drops To Record Low; 61.4% Of Youth Without A Job”
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-13/greek-unemployment-hits-new-record-people-employed-drops-record-low-614-youth-withou
“While I don’t agree with Guantanamo or the clear abuses of human rights which were carried out there perhaps I could ask the question to those condemning the US whether they believe that any of the people detained at Guantanamo presented a danger to public safety and liberty, and if so how they should have been dealt with given that much of the evidence held would not ordinarily be admissible in a properly constituted court?”
It is hard to say. But by breaking international law we are never going to find out.
The US offered bounties of $5,000 (nothing has changed since Matt Dillon was gun-slinging) for information about English-speaking people in Afghanistan who might be suspected of terrorist activities. That’s how Moazzam Begg and Shaker Aamer, who were running a school there (teaching girls as well as boys), until the US bombed the school and the house where Moazzam and Shaker were living. I’ve heard Moazzam speak about the torture methods used in Bagram and Gauntanamo, and seen the film about a Canadian boy (15 when he was wounded and arrested), where a Canadian interrogator abuses the child trying to get him to confess to having murdered a US soldier. It is not funny that when a US soldier dies in conflict it is called “murder” yet the countless murders perpetrated by US soldiers are just “deaths”. The US started these wars. They will not have an open debate on 9/11. They have no right to torture, imprison, and in the case of Shaker, continually imprison because they do not want to be seen in the world as torturers. As you might have guessed ESLO, I have no time for the Yanks any more. And all that talk about freedom in the west is pure nonsense, as Edward Snowden has shown.
“Moazzam and Shaker, who . . . living” were delivered into US hands.
A pity you cannot edit after commenting!!!
Someone, 12:46 pm: which bit of the educationforum link did you wish to draw my attention to?
If you’re really serious about computer security and privacy, most Linux-based distributions are not suitable. Oh, they’re much better than Windows or Mac, they’ll protect you against the commercial / semi-criminal stuff and they won’t collect masses of malware (which seems almost a hobby with Windows)…
But the standard Linux kernel contains proprietary “binary blobs”:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Binary_blob
undisclosed pieces of code that can be changed by the company that supplies them whenever your system performs an update. And in this sense, Ubuntu is probably one of the worst distributions.
The most trustworthy distributions are listed here:
http://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
I ought to stress when I talk about the “Yanks” and “US” I am not referring to individual US citizens, but the government leaders and military who indulge themselves in such bad practices. I have many US friends, who share my views. I fear for them in the developing police state.
I fear ESLO is a stranger to irony.
A bit like you are unacquainted with sarcasm.
John
I think you have ducked my questions with the assistance of your friends in the US Govt. Could you point to the current international law which would allow a court to try someone detained in a foreign country who was suspected to be involved in a conspiracy to commit a terrorist activity. You have not usually been shy in the past in identifying those who might be involved in such conspiracies – so why the reluctance to give your views about whether or not there are any such persons among the Guantanamo detainees. You have pointed out two who clearly based on the evidence you present are innocent and should never have been detained – but what about the rest?